Strilanc

60 ms·

571.
by Strilanc 10y ago
The post [and me, since I wrote it] recommends the video series Quantum Computing for the Determined [1]. If you're more familiar with physics than programming, Leonard Susskind's 'Quantum Mechanics: The Theoretical Minimum&#
572.
Quirk: A webgl quantum circuit simulator(algorithmicassertions.com)
3 points by Strilanc 10y ago|0 comments
573.
by Strilanc 10y ago
Actually, this issue also applies to probability theory. It does get more subtle, though, because theories might predict observations with differing probabilities and what matters is the difference in probabilities. But this this case the
574.
by Strilanc 10y ago
No. Why would it demonstrate that? Beliefs affect actions whether or not those beliefs are accurate. Consider: 'Does the observation that people who believe in [demons] act differently than people who don't demonstrate that [demon
575.
by Strilanc 10y ago
A simple example of a "measurement effect" is the quantum zeno effect [1]. You can steer a system by making a series of measurements and gradually transitioning the measurement axis from aligning with the initial state to aligning
576.
by Strilanc 10y ago
Making a delayed eraser would be neat, but it's just a matter of having the signal particle bias the eraser particle. It doesn't require non-local interactions (thanks to the delay). The actually difficult task, the one protected
577.
by Strilanc 10y ago
Why would a MW faq address criticisms of the Copenhagen interpretation?
578.
by Strilanc 10y ago
Pop-science articles about quantum mechanics make this fallacy (affirming the consequent) all the time. Them: "PilotWave implies E. E was observed. Therefore PilotWave!" Everyone: "AAAAAaaaaaaaaaaargh! That is not how science
579.
by Strilanc 10y ago
This post starts off good, but... - The motivation behind this post is storing generated IDs for a site the author is working on. Generated IDs don't have the "smaller values are exponentially more likely" property that make
580.
by Strilanc 10y ago
There's also drag-and-drop in-browser circuit simulators, which can be a bit more approachable than the quantum computing playground's scripting UI. Davy Wybiral's simulator: http://www.davyw.com/quantum&#x2
581.
by Strilanc 10y ago
The oracle is just a circuit that negates one of the amplitudes. You specify it just like the rest of the circuit. They use a trivial oracle circuit as an example. But Grover's algorithm works for any oracle circuit, so in principle it
582.
by Strilanc 10y ago
Yeah, using the GPU makes a huge difference. It's also incredibly finicky because the hardware and browser support varies so much. Basically I represent an n-qubit superposition as a 2^(n/2) x 2^(n/2) texture with each pixel
583.
by Strilanc 10y ago
Thanks. The other issue with the links is that the braces keep getting cut off by sites (as happened for your link, need to include that last } for it to work). But having the URL be the save mechanism is just so darn appealing to me. I gen
584.
by Strilanc 10y ago
Oh! Didn't realize you would see this. Gives me the opportunity to say thanks for the simulator. I found it really useful for learning. So useful for sanity checks. (Speaking of measurement. Quirk allows measurement... but it cheats. I
585.
by Strilanc 10y ago
I have my own shameless plug to add. Another drag-and-drop quantum circuit simulator that runs in your browser is "Quirk" [0]. Quirk is faster than Davy's simulator thanks to webgl. It calculates varying operations on up to 1
586.
by Strilanc 10y ago
Misleading title. (The original title is even worse, claiming to give "mathematically proven winning strategies".) The article is actually about simple models for various games. What are the most popular chess moves. Thinking of D
587.
by Strilanc 10y ago
> You could use this model of recording inputs and playing them back on the server but that seems like it would be a ton of work if your game is popular and an extraordinary cost for keeping a simple score board clean. You only need to
588.
by Strilanc 10y ago
The linked post mentions a previous post [1] where he mentions that proving you have the optimal path doesn't always require N! cost: > If you have an instance of the TSP of practical interest (i.e. it makes a difference to your li
589.
Eve's Quantum Clone Computer(algorithmicassertions.com)
1 points by Strilanc 10y ago|0 comments
590.
by Strilanc 10y ago
A more relevant post by Scott is The Control Group is Out of Control [1]. The starting off point is that parapsychology has high-quality studies with positive results, but we're pretty sure parapsychology is wrong, and this bodes poorl
591.
by Strilanc 11y ago
They count fake download buttons as social engineering. Excellent.
592.
by Strilanc 11y ago
Notable error in the article. They say: > about half of the characters used on Instagram are emoji ( http://gizmodo.com/emojis-are-becoming-the-dominant-language... ) but the linked article says: > As of March 2015
593.
by Strilanc 11y ago
That "brilliant design" is permanently wasting 15% of the screen real-estate on showing buttons irrelevant to reading the article. (Why is it pinned??)
594.
by Strilanc 11y ago
That's true. Many behaviors (including human behaviors) are better understood outside of the context of goals [1]. But I don't think that affects whether it makes sense to modify your terminal goals (to the extent that you have th
595.
by Strilanc 11y ago
You're confusing instrumental goals with terminal goals.
596.
by Strilanc 11y ago
By "super-intelligent" I meant "surprisingly good at achieving specified goals in real life". A super-optimizer. An optimizer that modifies its goals is bad at achieving specified goals, so if that's what you had
597.
by Strilanc 11y ago
> assuming the existence of a "superintelligent AI" without addressing how a goal-optimizing machine becomes a superintelligent AI I'm just talking about the fallout if one did exist, saw ways to achieve goals that you d
598.
by Strilanc 11y ago
Goals are orthogonal to intelligence. The fact that the AI understands what you want won't motivate it to change what it's optimizing. It's not being dumb, it's being literal . You asked it to make lots of paperclips, t
599.
by Strilanc 11y ago
Google mentions focusing on city driving instead of highway driving in their annual disengagement report [1]: > Mastering autonomous driving on city streets -- rather than freeways, interstates or highways -- requires us to navigate com
600.
Don't Use GitHub Pages' Jekyll Support(algorithmicassertions.com)
2 points by Strilanc 11y ago|0 comments

More ›